Re: [Powertop] Completion of error handling

Re: [Powertop] Completion of error handling

[SF Markus Elfring]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1487 bytes --]

>> Would it be acceptable to integrate a tool like "AspectC++" into the build
>> process for your software?
>> http://aspectc.org/
> 
> I think it would be a severe mistake - even if AspectC++ is an excellent tool
> it is a tool that almost nobody (well, save for you) knows about and so I
> would say it adds a big cost to contributing to the project.

Thanks for your feedback.

How are the chances to delegate more software maintenance tasks to dedicated
development tools?


> So, why would you want it?

Would you like to build programs that are more flexible and secure together?

Do you want to achieve benefits from the aspect design dimension?


> Convince us!

I try that again. I hope that you like to consider a few improved approaches.

How do you think about to improve static source code analysis also for your
software?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tools_for_static_code_analysis#C.2FC.2B.2B

Do you find information sources like the following useful?
* Article "A Reusable Aspect for Memory Allocation Checking"
  http://aspectc.net/ac_tutorial.html#reusablemachecking

* Document "Aspect-Oriented Software Development - An Introduction"
  by Johan Brichau and Theo D'Hondt
  http://www.info.ucl.ac.be/~jbrichau/courses/introductionToAOSD.pdf

* Paper "On Typesafe Aspect Implementations in C++"
  by Daniel Lohmann and Olaf Spinczyk
  http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.125.2164

Regards,
Markus

Re: [Powertop] Completion of error handling

[Magnus Fromreide]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 532 bytes --]

On Sat, Nov 01, 2014 at 10:06:01AM +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> > They are both great ideas to make PowerTOP more robust.
> 
> Would it be acceptable to integrate a tool like "AspectC++" into the build
> process for your software?
> http://aspectc.org/

I think it would be a severe mistake - even if AspectC++ is an excellent tool
it is a tool that almost nobody (well, save for you) knows about and so I
would say it adds a big cost to contributing to the project.

So, why would you want it? Convince us!

/MF

Re: [Powertop] Completion of error handling

[SF Markus Elfring]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 206 bytes --]

> They are both great ideas to make PowerTOP more robust.

Would it be acceptable to integrate a tool like "AspectC++" into the build
process for your software?
http://aspectc.org/

Regards,
Markus

Re: [Powertop] Completion of error handling

[Alexandra Yates]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 623 bytes --]


>> This is a good idea,  please send your patches with the fixes.
>
> I suggest to avoid ignorance of return values a bit more.
> https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/252
>
> Are you interested to apply aspect-oriented software development?
> How do you think about to encapsulate error detection and corresponding
> exception handling as a reusable aspect in your software?
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspect_%28computer_programming%29
>
> Regards,
> Markus
>
>

Hi Markus,

They are both great ideas to make PowerTOP more robust.  Please sent your
patches for review.

Thank you,
Alexandra.

Re: [Powertop] Completion of error handling

[SF Markus Elfring]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 459 bytes --]

> This is a good idea,  please send your patches with the fixes.

I suggest to avoid ignorance of return values a bit more.
https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/252

Are you interested to apply aspect-oriented software development?
How do you think about to encapsulate error detection and corresponding
exception handling as a reusable aspect in your software?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspect_%28computer_programming%29

Regards,
Markus

[Powertop] Completion of error handling

[SF Markus Elfring]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 738 bytes --]

Hello,

I have looked at a few source files for your current software. I have noticed
that some checks for return codes are missing.

Would you like to add more error handling for return values from functions like
the following?
- fputs ⇒ finish_report_output

https://github.com/fenrus75/powertop/blob/79123b34cf2cac2edeb918087dfc73f7b219cf54/src/report/report.cpp#L200

- pthread_create ⇒ cpu_calibration

https://github.com/fenrus75/powertop/blob/cdff23d6e40e31a68286a51e3c94c8a901a74091/src/calibrate/calibrate.cpp#L252

- pthread_join ⇒ extech_power_meter::end_measurement

https://github.com/fenrus75/powertop/blob/a5465a282107da5205b7928fe4ce4f642d1fd770/src/measurement/extech.cpp#L328

Regards,
Markus